web 2.0, design & community
Last July, I spoke at the inaugural Ignite/LA on the use of virtual communities to enable strategic knowledge sharing across the enterprise. It took a while, but the video is now online.
The Ignite format uses 20 slides which auto-advance every 15 seconds making the presentation length a total of five minutes. The next Ignite/LA will be held on Monday, June 7th in Santa Monica. You can now register online.
Knowledge management is commonly understood as an enterprise initiative, usually with the objectives of collecting, capturing and reusing knowledge and expertise within the enterprise. The rise of cloud computing, social media and free collaboration tools has made it possible for communities of like-minded people to form outside the context of the enterprise — a form of ad-hoc knowledge sharing and collaboration.
Examples of such communities abound, including (in the KM realm) KMers.org, KMwaves.org and SIKM. But you don’t need to look further than Google to find a wealth of thriving community eco-systems, many with processes for identifying experts and collecting knowledge. Easy access to collaboration tools like Twitter, Skype, blogs, wikis and Google Wave provide the underlying technology that makes such collaboration possible among participants who might otherwise never meet.
It’s reasonable to suggest that real knowledge management occurs in many of these external communities, even if it isn’t really considered KM by its participants.
In this environment, each enterprise (theoretically) has its own knowledge management methodology and systems. In addition, each external community (i.e. KMers.org) also has their own methodology and systems… and community. A professional at Partner C can collaborate and share knowledge within their own enterprise, and/or within any number of external communities. But they remain separate systems. When internal knowledge and expertise comes up short, he must repeat the process (if he’s motivated) in whatever external communities he is involved in.
Extra-Enterprise KM
What I am interested in exploring is what I’ve termed extra-enterprise knowledge management. This involves tightly coupled KM shared within a known group of enterprises, and ideally with integration to traditional intra-enterprise KM systems.
In this environment, there remain internal KM processes and tools, but with strong connections to other valued enterprises — clients, partners, suppliers and in some cases even competitors may fit the bill. The professional in Company A can begin their search for knowledge or expertise within their enterprise, but can also extend that to include the community that “lives” at the intersection of the participating enterprises. It’s KM beyond the firewall.
This happens today in small groups, and generally through personal networking (who you know). I’d like to extend this to the broader enterprise.
There are numerous obstacles and questions that must be resolved to make this a reality. There are legal and regulatory problems, technical issues, and culture clashes, each of which I will explore in the future. But extra-enterprise KM holds tremendous promise for extending and leveraging knowledge sharing and collaboration. Whatever it is called, it’s the next wave of KM.
Interested in continuing the discussion? I am moderating a Twitter chat event titled KM Beyond the Firewall at KMers.org on March 9, 2010 at noon EST.
This week, I’ll be attending the Office 2.0 conference in San Francisco. Most of my colleagues and friends gave me quizzical looks when I told them about the conference, wondering why on earth I’d want to go to a conference about Microsoft Office. Office 2.0 may be about a lot of things, but it’s most certainly not about a certain well-known suite of programs from a company in Redmond.
So what is Office 2.0?
For starters, it’s the name of the conference described on the web site as “…a collective experiment organized every year in San Francisco, CA and aimed at discovering the future of online productivity & collaboration. It is a unique gathering of visionaries, thought leaders, and customers using innovative online services for getting things done at the office, at home, and on the go.”
Wikipedia describes Office 2.0 as “…a marketing neologism representing the concepts of office productivity applications as published applications rather than stand-alone programs. The term leverages the Web 2.0 concept to conjure imagery of collaborative, community based and centralised effort rather than the more traditional application running on a platform locally.”
So just as Web 2.0 embraces the community and user-generated content, Office 2.0 explores new ways of working in a primarily online, collaborative environment.
I’ve seen firsthand success with collaborative online communities, particularly with the online, community-centric approach Fluor has taken with knowledge management. Distributed ownership, administration and accountability, coupled with a culture that encourages every voice to be heard has proven to be not only extremely effective, but essential to success.
In the spirit of “eating your own dogfood” the conference is paperless. Instead, each participant is given an HP 2133 Mini-Note running Linux, with wireless access to all of the tools necessary during the conference: Google Apps for email and calendaring; ClearSpace for discussions, blogging and publishing; Zoho for presentations and so on. On Wednesday, we will split into teams and respond to a simulated enterprise crisis in which we’ll put all these tools to work to solve the problem.
I’m looking forward to meeting others who are applying these concepts to support their business strategy, and learning innovative ways to stimulate similar success throughout the enterprise.
The Challenge
Probably the largest challenge to Office 2.0 is breaking down the barriers put up by IT Czars and establishing trusted, reliable ways to work outside the firewall and in the cloud. Most enterprises are leery, and rightly so, of putting their eggs in someone else’s basket. It will be interesting to see how other companies are tackling this issue.
Check back here and via Twitter, and I will keep you posted throughout the week from Office 2.0.
Merlin Mann of 43folders presented a talk titled “Inbox Zero” at Google this past Monday. Inbox Zero echoes the bit literacy concepts promoted by Mark Hurst. The video is an hour long, but Merlin provides a compelling argument for proactively managing your inbox.
Source: 43folders
Knowledge management is like teenage sex. Everyone is talking about it all the time, everyone thinks everyone else is doing it, almost no one is really doing it although everyone is bragging about it, and those who are doing it aren’t doing it very well. – Randy Harless
The unspoken truth behind this clever quote is that there are still some teenagers having good sex — and some companies doing KM well.
Originally seen in CIO Insight back in 2001 and resurfaced by John Maloney.
Dr. David Vaine of Apparently KM, PLC illuminates the obfuscation of knowledge management (KM) and the corporate world. Funny and poignant.
Enjoy!
Have you noticed the search results in Google degrading? I find more and more garbage web sites in the results. Sure the top results are usually pretty decent, but some are way off the mark. The problem is, no matter how often the smart people at Google tweak their PR algorhythm, there is an entire army of SEO experts looking to game the system as they try to get on the first page of results. And many of the web sites playing the SEO game are unfortunately pretty lame.
Enter Mahalo. The Hawaiian word for “thank you,” Mahalo bills itself as a human-powered search engine. The value proposition? The search results have all been screened by human editors, ensuring you get just the really good web sites.
In their own words:
Mahalo is the world’s first human-powered search engine powered by an enthusiastic and energetic group of Guides. Our Guides spend their days searching, filtering out spam, and hand-crafting the best search results possible. If they haven’t yet built a search result, you can request that search result. You can also suggest links for any of our search results.
Mahalo has only just launched their alpha today. According to CEO Jason Calacanis, they served 100,000 pages in the first hour of operation.
The idea is appealing, for sure. I took it for a quick spin, of course, testing to see if any of my web sites turned up. First I tried searching for instant messaging, only to be told ‘Oops! We haven’t hand-written a result page for “instant messaging” yet.’ Instead, I’m presented with the option to be notified when they do create their own results page, and a list of (what else?) Google’s search results. Back to square one.
Okay, next I tried “windows live messenger” with the same lack of of hand-crafted results. Hmmm…
They claim they are starting by going after the top terms. Obviously(?) I’m not hitting the top terms yet.
I try searching for the popular VoIP app Skype, and finally hit paydirt!
The results were decent. Without heavy analysis, they seemed to be a streamlined version of what you’d find on the first page of Google’s own search results for skype, plus a few recent Skype news stories (courtesy of Google News).
Each of their hand-written pages also includes a message board, allowing you to discuss what is or isn’t on the page. And you can see who at Mahalo wrote the page. The Skype page, for instance, was written by Dave from Los Angeles. He’s written a bunch of other Mahalo results pages, too. Sadly, Dave hasn’t included a link to BigBlueBall. Fortunately, I can recommend a link, too.
I checked the Skype results message board, but was promptly told that I had to login to participate on the message board. Ok, that means creating an account. So now, I’m User ID 342, a.k.a. Jeff.
What do you think of Mahalo, both in concept and execution? Could Mahalo, or something like it, supplant Google someday? And “Mahalo” for your comments!
UPDATE: BigBlueBall is on Mahalo! The BigBlueBall AIM Center made The Mahalo Top 7 for AOL Instant Messenger.
Professor Gervaise Germaine explains the difference between data, information and knowledge.
Enjoy! 
The social network is a buzzword that every Web 2.0 company has to include in their pitch. But what is it? Does social networking matter, or is it just a bunch of hype?
Here’s my brief, unobjective primer to social networks.
When explaining knowledge management to people, I usually tell them that it’s really nothing new. We have been sharing knowledge for ages, both on a personal level and with larger groups of people. At work, you ask a co-worker a question, and they share an answer. The tacit knowledge of one employee is transferred to another in that social transaction.
Likewise, social networks are not anything new. We all have our own personal networks, subconsciously tagged as family, friends, co-workers, business associates and so on.
Wikipedia describes a social network as “…a social structure made of nodes which are generally individuals or organizations. It indicates the ways in which they are connected through various social familiarities ranging from casual acquaintance to close familial bonds.”
So if social networking is nothing new, what’s all the fuss about?
The popularity of so-called social networking sites like MySpace and LinkedIn have captured the attention of the media. These sites generally revolve around the ability for members to setup a personal profile, and identify connections with other members.
In it’s simplest implementation, MySpace is merely a reflection of pre-existing social network structures. A teenager and his friends join, setup profiles, and add each other to their “friends” list. They already know each other. In this case, the virtual network is a mirror image of their real world network of friends.
The virtual networks make it easier to forge new connections, though the tensile strength of those connections is generally much weaker than real world connections. On MySpace, it’s not uncommon to find people who are looking to add everyone and anyone who will accept them as a friend, sometimes generating tens of thousands of friends. Naturally these are not real friends, and the connection can’t really be considered a relationship.
It’s not always vaccuous. Just as in the real world, people are also creating new relationships through these virtual social networks. Sites like Flickr and Last.fm encourage this by showing other members and giving you an opportunity to meet someone whose photography catches your eye, or who has a similar taste in music. These relationships begin much like the old pen-pal relationships I remember from grade school. They begin as virtual communication, and sometimes extend into the real world.
I have a friend who used to spend a lot of time online, communicating with people all over the world via instant messaging. Her network of friends was vast, but tenuous. Eventually, she chose to pull back from the online network and focus on the people she sees face-to-face (which includes some people that she initially met online at one time).I can understand and respect that choice. The tenuous nature of online-only relationships can be shallow and unfulfilling. People are wired for more than cerebral interaction; like Peter Gabriel said “I need contact!“
Personally, I’ve made a number of new friends online, through discussion forums such as BigBlueBall, shared interest sites like Flickr and even sites like MySpace. Most of them I’ve never met, and I only know them through our online interaction (and their online personae). Some of them I correspond with regularly via instant messaging or voice chat. A few (about seven, so far) I have met ‘IRL’ (in real life), further strengthening the connection.
Some people may find it strange to make friends online, but it’s not much different from meeting new friends in your community. You participate in an activity with other people (going to church; playing tennis; playing World of Warcraft; exploring Second Life). In the process, you meet some people that you get along with, and a friendship begins.
So what does this mean for online social networks, particularly in the context of Web 2.0 and beyond?
My fortune cookie encourages me to expand my social network. It’s good advice, but I’d like to hear from you. How do you recommend I expand my social circle?
David McCandless is a journalist who has developed a passion for making sense … [Read More...]
Great talk from hotelier Chip Conley at TED on building a business model based … [Read More...]
Last July, I spoke at the inaugural Ignite/LA on the use of virtual communities … [Read More...]